Thanks for your response. These are for new videos created as a part of our how-to video call. When the corresponding video has been created, we will update the thread as completed and include a link to the new video.

We like your suggestion of offering a way to run this export in the user interface as well, but we will not be able to work on that right now. Our current priority is getting information into ORCID records and that’s where we’re focusing our development.

We will be using your feedback to improve affiliations as a part of our development for API 3.0. Keep watch on our Current Development Trello board / GitHub for our work on 3.0: https://trello.com/b/iuJwm8A6

Pleased to share that we aim to create a community working group (https://orcid.org/about/community ) to consider this and other issues related to the types of research outputs and engagement and how they should be recognized on the ORCID record. Watch our blog for the announcement!

[edit] The working group has been put on hold for the time being. We are working on more internally to revamp affiliations, and hope to share more on this soon.

Since you’ve first submitted this suggestion, we’ve improved the appearance of the search bar, and are now working on the affiliations search. You can follow progress on the Current Development Trello at: https://trello.com/c/7OywbDz8/3102

We have also started working on adding an affiliation search field to the advanced search options: https://orcid.org/orcid-search/search You can find it on the advanced search page, however there is not yet a column which displays the affiliation listing in the search results.

Thanks for your comment. We're soon going to unveil an application that we've developed for just this use.

It's something like Doodle for ORCID iDs: You create a page for, say, your event and then link it to the group of contacts (conference registrants or attendees). They'll be able to sign into their ORCID accounts to authenticate their identities, and then their name will be added to the list along with their authenticated ORCID iDs. You'll then be able to download them all in text format.

Please note that we do not recommend using the ORCID search to disambiguate researchers. The ORCID search is useful for finding some basic information -- for example, institutions can use the ORCID API search to find out how many researchers are *publicly* asserting an affiliation with their institution. https://members.orcid.org/api/resources/find-myresearchers

However we would not recommend that an institution consider those search results definitive. User control over their iD and information connected to it is a key principle of ORCID; that means that ORCID record holders choose what data they wish to make public on their ORCID record, or whether to add any data at all: https://orcid.org/blog/2016/05/05/user-control-over-who-sees-what

Our recommendation, rather, is that if you want to find a researcher's iD, then you should ask them to provide it. You can do this by asking them to sign into your system -- e.g. a manuscript submission system -- to confirm that they are in control of that ORCID iD. The system accepting that ORCID iD can then read other data on the ORCID record to add to their understanding of the user, but it is the authentication that is key: without asking the researcher to sign in, you do not know whether that iD indeed belongs to them, or whether it belongs to someone with the same name.

This is a great suggestion, but one that needs review before we can act on it. As ORCID is an international undertaking we have to comply with privacy regulations in numerous countries, some of which affect how we are able to share email address, even with trusted parties.

Thanks for your question. You can follow our Current Development Trello board to see when things will go live on the production server: https://trello.com/b/iuJwm8A6 Cards in the Launchpad queue will be the next to go live.

At present, the current stable version of the ORCIDAPI, v1.2, does not make it possible to clearly state which items have been added or updated to the ORCID record via the ORCIDAPI. (This is what such notifications are indicating.)

The simplest method to determine what was added or updated at present is by checking the creation date (via more details view). The modification date can also be viewed via the ORCID public API.

The API version currently in development, v2.0, supports the addition and updating of individual works items. It is possible that this could result in more informative notifications.

We would appreciate hearing further suggestions on how the addition/update notifications can improve. What information do you expect to see in them?

Thanks for your comment, anonymous. Because of the limitations of the 1.2 version of the API, yes, if you want to see what has been newly added, then you will need to check the creation date of each item.

You can get the details for all of your works at once using the public API, e.g. https://pub.orcid.org/v2.0/xxxx-xxxx-xxxx-xxxx/works and then searching for the matching creation date. That us API only, however. In the user interface, you would need to click on each item's details view for more information.

Perhaps a feature that could help with those issues might be a view option to sort works by date created and date updated? If you think that'd be useful, why not submit it as an iDea? : )

Great suggestion. This is on our list of things to do, it just doesn’t have a high priority. I’ve listed the idea as under review as we will need to have staff look into it further before we make any changes.

Thanks for the reminder. We're going to flag this so our team can get an update this quarter, but we probably will not be able to get a response until after the release of the 2.0 API this month.

The 2.0 API is a major update which will significantly change how integrators interact with the ORCID Registry. However subsequent versions are expected to come at a much faster rate as the changes will be more incremental.

We'd like to get your thoughts on how this could be implemented. The weightiness of one type over another may differ between user. How might the relative importance of work types be measured? Would users be able to go through the list of all work types and set their preferred display?

Thanks Mark. We're going to add this to the list of suggested features for the Registry.

In the meantime, you may be interested in the ORCID Widget, which is currently a hidden feature. When you're signed in, go to https://orcid.org/my-orcid?widget and click "Share your ORCID iD on other sites" to access the widget.

What are your thoughts for slightly amending this to be adding works using BibTeX?

This could include sources of BibTeX in addition to Google Scholar. It could also mention common BibTeX issues, such as BibTeX exported from EndNote not being immediately able to be imported and requiring the use of a filter. (KAUST has kindly made a modified BibTeX filter for EndNote available: http://libguides.kaust.edu.sa/orcid )